The 2020 General Election Thread

[jamil]

It’s obvious Trump is the only candidate in the race who lies about his accomplishments. Right, you people who think your candidate is honest and true and moral and likes puppies as much as you do?

 

[churchmouse]

Fellas.......

 

[KG1]

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...e-became-a-professor-after-leaving-the-senate

"Former Vice President Joe Biden raised confusion Wednesday during a virtual round table after claiming he became a “professor” when he left the U.S. Senate.

"When I left the United States Senate, I became a professor at the University of Pennsylvania," Biden claimed. "And I've spent a lot of time — and the University of Delaware has the Biden School as well, so I've spent a lot of time on campus with college students."


Biden became vice president after leaving the Senate in 2009 and received the title of "Benjamin Franklin Presidential Practice Professor" from the University of Pennsylvania in 2017. He never taught any classes, according to his own spokesperson at the time.


Biden’s claim immediately drew attention on social media."

This would be like an honorary "Kentucky Colonel" claiming they were in the military and had service members under their command.

 

[jamil]

Fellas.......

Okay, okay. I fixed it. I took the name out.

 

[drillsgt]

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. I would not bet on either, but the odds are that Biden wins, America loses.

Why would you think biden wins? biden's not up anywhere near the level that hillary was, the only reason biden has any support at all is he's the D candidate.

 

[KG1]

Okay, okay. I fixed it. I took the name out.

Wada ya mean by "You people"?

 

[Alpo]

You didn’t actually say anything. My contention is that Twitter controls the market they’re in. Who are their competitors? Name them. Then tell me what their market shares are. THAT’S how you refute my claim. J.

Actually, they don't. Sites like INGO. Reddit. Youtube. Tumblr.

I don't need to give you market shares, I only need to refute your claim. You stand refuted, amigo. The information provided on Twitter today would move to any number of different sites without losing a step if Twitter was shut down tomorrow. When Twitter moved from 140 characters to 280 characters, did they enter a new market? No. Of course not. "Micro-blogging" is a term of art. If a 140 character limit is a microblog, was is a 280 character limit? I'll tell you: it's arbitrary and self-imposed.

Twitter's temporary demise sent users to other social networks, including the blogging site Tumblr. As one commenter put it on CNNMoney's own Tech Tumblr: "I enjoy the fact that when Twitter goes down, my Tumblr explodes. "

 

[bwframe]

Sorry if this has been brought up but since early voting started the number of people lining up each day to vote early here in the “People’s Republic of Monroe County” is mind boggling. We have people wrapping around an entire city block waiting to cast their vote at 8:00 AM and this has been going on for days. I have been told by business owners near the polling place that there is always a line starting at 8:00 AM until closing at 6pm. I tried to vote yesterday at 1:30 PM and walked away when the line only stretched one city block thinking I would get the jump on people early this morning but it was 4 times worse this morning. Will try again right before the polls close at 6pm. There is something in the air when you have so many people willing to put up will this kind of inconvenience to cast a vote. So far 2020 has been one wild ride and we aren’t at the top of the roll-a-coaster hill yet so hang on cause the next two months could be something you tell your grandkids about.

They are really big about getting that early voting in Monroe County on local news and social media.

Call me paranoid, but I'd be concerned that my straight ticket R vote would disappear if submitted early in uber-lib Monroe County?

I'm hoping that on the actual election day there is more two party supervision to insure election integrity?

So many issues you hear from all around the country with ballot problems, on top of the libs wanting less and less voter authentication makes them really hard to trust.

 

[chipbennett]

Actually, they don't. Sites like INGO. Reddit. Youtube. Tumblr.

I don't need to give you market shares, I only need to refute your claim. You stand refuted, amigo. The information provided on Twitter today would move to any number of different sites without losing a step if Twitter was shut down tomorrow. When Twitter moved from 140 characters to 280 characters, did they enter a new market? No. Of course not. "Micro-blogging" is a term of art. If a 140 character limit is a microblog, was is a 280 character limit? I'll tell you: it's arbitrary and self-imposed.

None of those sites compete with Twitter. INGO and Reddit are forums. YouTube is vlogging. Tumbler is more like Pinterest. Applicable Twitter competitors would include Parler and Gab.

"Micro-blogging" is a format, not a market. You are correct that the character limit is arbitrary, in that it doesn't really impact the market. The market is the people served and the use of the medium - what is being supplied, what is being demanded, and how the medium meets that supply and demand.

You admitted that you do not use social media, so I struggle to understand why you seem to insist so strongly that you know so much about it.

 

[Alpo]

A distinction without a difference. They are all under the umbrella of "social media".

You would have a much better argument that Twitter is a utility. It is not a monopoly. You are attempting to nail Jello to the wall.

 

[Alpo]

None of those sites compete with Twitter. INGO and Reddit are forums. YouTube is vlogging. Tumbler is more like Pinterest. Applicable Twitter competitors would include Parler and Gab.

"Micro-blogging" is a format, not a market. You are correct that the character limit is arbitrary, in that it doesn't really impact the market. The market is the people served and the use of the medium - what is being supplied, what is being demanded, and how the medium meets that supply and demand.

You admitted that you do not use social media, so I struggle to understand why you seem to insist so strongly that you know so much about it.

I don't use Twitter. But that's not the same as saying I don't use social media. You're promoting an argument that if I'm not in favor of Trump, I'm not a citizen. Specious.

 

[NKBJ]

Unleash the Magadon!

 

[chipbennett]

Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969)

Brandenburg v Ohio makes my point:

Since the statute, by its words and as applied, purports to punish mere advocacy and to forbid, on pain of criminal punishment, assembly with others merely to advocate the described type of action, it falls within the condemnation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Freedoms of speech and press do not permit a State to forbid advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.

And a reminder: you said "Falsehoods and fabrications are not protected free speech under the First Amendment"

Brandenburg v Ohio merely carved out an exception for speech that incites imminent lawless action and is likely to produce such action. "Falsehoods and fabrications" are not "imminent lawless action".

A better reference for you might be Gertz v. Welch

Gertz v Welch, similarly, makes my point:

Held:
1. A publisher or broadcaster of defamatory falsehoods about an individual who is neither a public official nor a public figure may not claim the New York Times protection against liability for defamation on the ground that the defamatory statements concern an issue of public or general interest...


2. The States, however, may not permit recovery of presumed or punitive damages when liability is not based on knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth, and the private defamation plaintiff who establishes liability under a less demanding standard than the New York Times test may recover compensation only for actual injury.

Two points:

1. It is not the speech that is unprotected; rather, it is the harm caused by the speech. The difference between your "falsehoods and fabrications" here is the inclusion of the adjective defamatory.

2. The underlying speech - i.e. the utterance - remains protected. Under the doctrine of prior restraint, laws that prohibit the speech itself are unconstitutional.

So, my point remains: "falsehoods and fabrications" are, indeed, protected speech under the First Amendment.

 

[chipbennett]

I don't use Twitter. But that's not the same as saying I don't use social media. You're promoting an argument that if I'm not in favor of Trump, I'm not a citizen. Specious.

There are many Social Media platforms. They don't all compete in the same markets. That's the part that you seem not to understand.

 

[Alpo]

I understand it I think. What you seem to be doing is extrapolating a subset of the Twitter feed and "universe" into a monopoly over political freedom to tell an untruth.

As I said, you don't have a monopoly. You may have a utility.

If Twitter disappeared tomorrow, the slack would be recovered shortly by other existing, and perhaps new, platforms. It doesn't restrict your ability to get a falsehood into the public domain if you so choose.

 

[chipbennett]

I understand it I think. What you seem to be doing is extrapolating a subset of the Twitter feed and "universe" into a monopoly over political freedom to tell an untruth.

As I said, you don't have a monopoly. You may have a utility.

If Twitter disappeared tomorrow, the slack would be recovered shortly by other existing, and perhaps new, platforms. It doesn't restrict your ability to get a falsehood into the public domain if you so choose.

I do think Twitter and Facebook are special cases, for a changed paradigm. In the modern internet age (this would NOT have been true in the early 2000s, up until the early 2010s, when personal blogs comprised a rich, diverse, and connected ecosphere), Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube (combined) are the primary means of consuming political information and news, communicating with public officials, generally expressing political speech, engaging in political dialogue with the public at-large, and petitioning for redress of grievances. "De-platforming", particularly when coordinated among the three major platforms, essentially stifles such political speech and engagement. You can disagree with it all you want, but it is true.

On the surface (I would probably want to research it more in-depth), I would be fine with declaring social media platforms - particularly the Big Three - to be public utilities.

 

[Alpo]

I don't disagree that it is the way you use those platforms. I disagree that those uses represent the lions share of activity on those platforms. For example, I primarily get performing arts on my youtube feed. Rarely does a political topic hit that front page. Normally, I get a political youtube referral from INGO.

I only use Facebook to stay in contact with friends and relatives and we don't talk politics or religion for the most part (almost always avoid it in fact).

Neither of those sites represent my first or second choice when looking for "hard" news. Twitter never has made the cut at all.

If I look at the top 50 people followed on Twitter, politics isn't the primary area of concentration. Sure Barry and Donald are there, but so is Kim Kardashian, WizKhalifa and RealMadrid. Perhaps the political wonks are ruining the site for the majority of users?

 

[NKBJ]

A man of many accomplishments, Archbishop Vigano.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Maria_Viganò
If you haven't already I'd like to encourage you fellas to check the guy out. Consider who and what he is, and what he's saying.

He recently had an interview, doubling down on his open letter to President Trump.
He called out those who have perpetrated the bank bug event. He speaks plainly about the beings who are arrayed against President Trump. These things that the archbishop has said, I think are totally true, totally correct. More reasons why I say I'm not sure what I'm voting for but I'm completely certain about what I'm voting against.

The open letter to President Trump.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinio...e-between-good-and-evil-playing-out-right-now

The interview.
https://catholicfamilynews.com/blog...s-his-claim-that-we-face-an-epochal-conflict/

And no, I'm not catholic. But I don't have to be catholic to recognize the unvarnished truth when it's set before me.

 

[chipbennett]

I don't disagree that it is the way you use those platforms. I disagree that those uses represent the lions share of activity on those platforms. For example, I primarily get performing arts on my youtube feed. Rarely does a political topic hit that front page. Normally, I get a political youtube referral from INGO.

I only use Facebook to stay in contact with friends and relatives and we don't talk politics or religion for the most part (almost always avoid it in fact).

Neither of those sites represent my first or second choice when looking for "hard" news. Twitter never has made the cut at all.

If I look at the top 50 people followed on Twitter, politics isn't the primary area of concentration. Sure Barry and Donald are there, but so is Kim Kardashian, WizKhalifa and RealMadrid. Perhaps the political wonks are ruining the site for the majority of users?

You are arguing the use of those platforms for other purposes, in other markets. That argument is a straw man. I defined the market and purpose in question: consuming political information and news, communicating with public officials, generally expressing political speech, engaging in political dialogue with the public at-large, and petitioning for redress of grievances.

It is entirely irrelevant that you use YouTube and Facebook for other purposes. (Side note: I use all three platforms, for different uses as well. It doesn't change the nature of the market in question.)

 

[Alpo]

You are defining political speech and discourse as a market. If so, Twitter is not the only purveyor.

I'm bored and don't want to carry this farther. I'm developing hives talking about something as useless to me as Twitter.